↓ Skip to main content

A validation study of the Stoyanova et al. method (2017) for age-at-death estimation quantifying the 3D pubic symphyseal surface of adult males of European populations

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Legal Medicine, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
A validation study of the Stoyanova et al. method (2017) for age-at-death estimation quantifying the 3D pubic symphyseal surface of adult males of European populations
Published in
International Journal of Legal Medicine, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00414-018-1934-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anežka Kotěrová, Jana Velemínská, Eugénia Cunha, Jaroslav Brůžek

Abstract

The age-at-death estimation thresholds have recently been shifted towards a more objective assessment of the aging process. Such a non-subjective approach offers quantitative methods of age estimation; for instance, the method relating to the surfaces of pubic symphyses of males published by Stoyanova et al. (J Forensic Sci 62:1434-1444, 2017). A validation study was conducted to test the method performance in European samples. The sample consisted of 96 meshes of pubic symphyses of male individuals (known sex and age) that came from four different samples (two Portuguese collections, one Swiss, and one Crete). Stoyanova's method based on five regression models (three univariate and two multivariate models) performed worse in our sample, but only when the whole sample (without age limitation) was included. A sample limited to individuals under 40 years of age achieved better results in our study. The best results were reached through the thin plate spline algorithm (TPS/BE) with a root mean square error of 5.93 years and inaccuracy of 4.47 years. Generally, the multivariate regression models did not contribute to better age estimation. In our sample in all age categories, age was systematically underestimated. The quantitative method tested in this study works best for individuals under 40 years of age and provides a suitable basis for further research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Other 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Lecturer 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 6 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Engineering 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 9 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2018.
All research outputs
#15,545,423
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#978
of 2,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,511
of 337,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#22
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,091 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.